Another King James Bible Believer

A Comparative Study of the Gospel of Mark

The purpose of this study is to show some of the textual differences that exist in the various bible versions that are popular today.

We will see that the so called "oldest and best" manuscripts, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, often disagree with each other. We will also observe that the Nestle-Aland (Westcott-Hort) Greek texts, upon which most modern versions are based, is continually changing, and that the various modern versions are inconsistent.

Some will follow one reading, while others a different one. If you are a modern version proponent, the only logical conclusion is that there is no settled text and no certainty as to what God's words really are.

The confusion begins in the very first verse of the gospel of Mark.

Mark 1:1 "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, THE SON OF GOD."

The words "the Son of God" are found in the Majority of all texts, including Vaticanus, Alexandrinus and D, but Sinaiticus original omits them. The ESV, NASB, NIV and NET version all cast doubt on their validity by a footnote that says: "Some manuscripts do not have 'the Son of God'."

And the UBS/Nestle-Aland critical Greek texts continue to put the words [in brackets] indicating doubt as to their authenticity. The Catholic version include the words, but the 1985 New Jerusalem has a footnote saying: "omit 'Son of God'.

Eugene Peterson's 'The Message' of 2002 actually omits the words "the Son of God", saying: "The good news of Jesus Christ--the Message!-begins here"

Mark 1:2 KJB - ”As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way BEFORE THEE.”

 

ESV (NIV, NASB, NET, Catholic Versions, Jehovah Witness NWT) - “As it is written IN ISAIAH THE PROPHET, Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way.”

 

 

 

 

The quotes here come from two different prophets, and that is why the King James reading is correct. "The prophets" is the reading found in the Majority of all texts including Alexandrinus, and the ancient Syriac Harkelian version. It is also the reading of the Coptic Boharic, Armenian, and Ethiopian ancient versions and is so quoted by Iraeneus in 202 A.D. and by Tertullian in 220, long before anything we have in the Greek copies. The Nestle-Aland Greek text apparatus lists one of the Old Latin texts "r" as reading "in Isaiah and in the prophets".

 

It receives Patristic citations from Church Fathers such as Irenaeus (202 AD), Photius, and Theophylact. 

 

Irenaeus writes: "Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in THE PROPHETS, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way". . . Plainly does the commencement of the Gospel quote the words of THE HOLY PROPHETS and point out Him at once, whom they confessed as God and Lord;" (Against Heresies, 3:10:5)

 

"Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee" comes from Malachi 3:1, and "The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord..." comes from the prophet Isaiah in chapter 40:3 - thus the correct reading of "IN THE PROPHETS". 

 

This is also the reading of Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley's translation 1755, Worsley Version 1770, Youngs 1898, Godbey N.T. 1902, the Hebrew Names Bible, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, The Interlinear Greek New Testament 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Lawrie Translation 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The Last Days Bible 1999, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Evidence Bible 2003, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, J.P. Green’s Literal Translation 2005, the English Majority Text 2009 (Paul Esposito), Faithful New Testament 2009, The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Online Interlinear 2010 (Andre de Mol), the Jubilee Bible of 2010, The Far Above All Translation 2011, The Modern Literal Version New Testament 2012, the 2012 Hebraic Roots Bible, the 2012 Natural Israelite Bible and the World English Bible 2012.

 

The Modern Greek Bible - "Καθως ειναι γεγραμμενον εν τοις προφηταις·"

 

And the Modern Hebrew Bible -  ככתוב בנביאים הנני שלח מלאכי לפניך ופנה דרכך לפניך׃


However Vaticanus and Sinaiticus say "Isaiah the prophet" and so the  RV, RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, Holman, ISV, NET  and ALL Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims 1582, Douay 1950, St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 all read in Mark 1:2: "As it is written IN ISAIAH THE PROPHET, Behold, I send my messenger...." 

 

Foreign language bibles that agree with the King James Bible's "as it is written in THE PROPHETS" are the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and the 2007 French Louis Segond - "Conformément à ce qui avait été écrit dans les prophètes", the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991 - "Come sta scritto nei profeti", the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada - "Como est escrito nos profetas", Luther's German Bible 1545 and the German Schlachter Bible 2000 - "wie geschrieben stehet in den Propheten",  the Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013, the Dutch Staten Vertaling, Afrikaans Bible 1953, the Finnish Bible 1776, the Hungarian Karoli, the Russian Synodal,  the Norwegian En Leavened Bok 1988, the Czech BKR, Romanian Fidela 2014, the Spanish Cipriano de Valera of 1602 and 1865 as well as the Reina Valera Gómez of 2010 - "Como está escrito en LOS PROFETAS" (BUT the Reina Valera's of 1960, 77 and 1995 have followed the reading of "en Isaías el profeta" thanks to people like Eugene Nida), and the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos 1998.

Matthew Henry:  "Isaiah and Malachi each spake concerning the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, in the ministry of John. From these prophets we may observe, that Christ, in his gospel, comes among us, bringing with him a treasure of grace, and a sceptre of government. Quotations are here borrowed from two prophecies--that of Isaiah, which was the longest, and that of Malachi, which was the latest (and there were above three hundred years between them), both of whom spoke to the same purport concerning the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, in the ministry of John.”

 

John Gill comments on Mark 1:2 - "As it is written in the prophets,.... Malachi and Isaiah; for passages out of both follow; though the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Persic versions read, "as it is written in the prophet Isaias"; and so it is in some Greek copies: but the former seems to be the better reading, since two prophets are cited, and Isaiah is the last; to which agree the Arabic and Ethiopic versions, and the greater number of Greek copies."

 

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary: - "As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee—(Mal 3:1; Isa 40:3). 

 

The Popular Commentary by Paul Kretzmann - As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, which shall prepare Thy way before Thee. Two of the prophets of olden times had distinctly described the person and the work of John the Baptist, and the evangelist combines their prophecies for the purpose of brevity.”  

 

John Lightfoot’s Commentary - “as it is written in THE PROPHETS” -  When two places are cited out of two prophets, it is far more congruously said, as it is written in the prophets; than, as it is written in Esaias: but especially when the place first alleged is not in Esaias, but in another prophet… It is clear enough, from the scope of the evangelist, that he propounded to himself to cite those two places, both out of Malachi and out of Esaias.”

 

Matthew Poole’s Commentary - “The prophets Malachi and Isaiah (saith the evangelist) prophesied of this beginning of the gospel. Malachi prophesied that before the great King should come unto Zion, a harbinger should come before him, to prepare his way. The angel, Luke 1:17, expounds both their prophecies, and also that Malachi 4:5; And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

 

 

In the last part of this verse we read in the KJB: "which shall prepare thy way BEFORE THEE." So read the Majority of all texts including Alexandrinus, but Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these two words and so do the ESV, NASB, NIV. The versions also disagree with each other in their footnotes. The NASB says "MANY manuscripts omit "before thee", while the ESV, NIV tell us "SOME manuscripts omit "before thee".


 Mark 1:14 "Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee preaching the gospel OF THE KINGDOM of God."

The words "of the kingdom" are found in the Majority of all texts, A and D, and in the Old Latin, the Syriac, and even in the Douay version. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the ESV, NIV, NASB. But now the new ISV (International Standard Version) is coming out and it has put "the kingdom" back in the text.

 

Mark 2:15 KJB - “And it came to pass, that, as JESUS sat at meat in HIS house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with JESUS and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.”


NKJV (ESV, NIV, NASB) - “Now it happened, as HE was dining in LEVI'S house, that many tax collectors and sinners also sat together with JESUS and His disciples; for there were many, and they followed Him.”

 

(Notice that the NKJV "added" the word "Levi's", but the NASB, ESV did not.  Many others do, though)


Some have criticized the King James Bible and tell us that it is in error because it “adds” that first word JESUS to the verse when it is not found in “the” Textus Receptus or the Critical text.  


Of course none of these Bible critics actually believe that any edition of “the” TR (there is no such animal as "the" TR. There are at least 14 varieties of it out there) or the ever changing Critical Greek text is in fact the complete and inerrant words of God either.  


When these guys start criticizing the KJB in this nit picky fashion, we know they are scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something they hope will stick so they can try to convince you that there is something wrong with God’s masterpiece.


But is their criticism valid?  Not at all, as we shall see in a moment.


The word JESUS appearing twice in Mark 2:15 may not be in today’s printed Greek texts, but that does not mean that the KJB is wrong for translating this verse the way they did. I think the arguments for they way they and MANY others translated it this way are quite compelling. 


They simply saw the need to clarify the text (not "add to" or "take away" from it) so that the common reader would not be confused as to who was “sitting at meat” and in whose “his house” this was where this event took place.



When we read the previous verse, it tells us: “And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the receipt of custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.”  


If we remove the word JESUS, the next verse then says: 


“And it came to pass, that, as he sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.” 


We would then have to ask Who was sitting at meat? and and In whose house did this take place? because we just got done reading about Matthew Levi.  


So to avoid any confusion, the KJB translators and MANY others (as we shall soon see) simply clarified the text. They didn’t “add” anything to the text, nor take any thing away from it. They just made it easier to understand.

 

 

One Bible version I found got confused and translated it wrong. It is called the Conservative Bible 2011 done by John Isett. Notice what he did in this verse.  


It says: As it happened, Jesus then dined at His house with a great many tax collectors and sinners who chose to follow Him.”


Here they “added” the first word Jesus, then omitted it from the second half of the verse, and then they Capitalized the word “Him”, making it Jesus’s house, rather than Matthew Levi’s house.



ALL the major bible versions “add” words like God, Jesus, the Lord, or Christ to varying degrees to clarify certain verses.  Popular versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB and NKJV ALL do this. 

 

I have a pretty good list of examples where they do this in my article on the expression “God forbid”.  You can see it here -


“God forbid” 


http://www.brandplucked.webs.com/godforbid.htm

 

In fact, I found about 20 different Bible translations that did what the NIV did here in Mark 2:15.  The NIV “added” the word JESUS to the first part of the verse, just as the KJB did, but then they omitted the word JESUS when it appears in all Greek texts in the second part of the verse.  And they “added” the word LEVI to the text, to clarify the words “his” house.  


This is how the NIV 1984 - 2011, The TNIV 2005, The New International Version 2011 and several other translations clarified the fact that it was Jesus who was sitting at meat and it took place in Matthew Levi’s house.  


The NIV reads: “While JESUS was having dinner at LEVI’S house, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.”  


At least 17 (SEVENTEEN) bibles I ran into translated the verse like this - “It came to pass, as JESUS sat at a meal in LEVI’S house, many publicans and sinners sat down together with JESUS and His disciples, for there were many who also followed him.



These were The Contemporary English Version 1995, The God’s Word Translation 1995, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, The New Century Version 2005, The Easy to Read Version 2006, The Spoken English N.T. 2008, The Easy English Bible 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The Orthodox Jewish bible 2011, The Common English Bible 2011, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011,  The Names of God Bible 2011, The Voice Translation 2012, The New Living Translation 2013 and The Translator’s Bible 2014.   All of these have the word JESUS twice and they “add” LEVI to the text as well. 


The Translator’s Bible 2014 even went further than the others and had the name of JESUS three times plus they added LEVI too, saying: 


Later, JESUS was eating a meal in LEVI’S house. Many men who collected taxes and other people who were considered to be sinning regularly were eating with JESUS and his disciples. This was not surprising, for there were many people like this who were going everywhere with JESUS.”



Back to Mark 2:15 and the KJB’s  - JESUS……JESUS 


Not only does the King James Bible have the name of JESUS two times in this verse, but so also do the following Bible translations - Tyndale 1534, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Beza New Testament 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, the Clarke N.T. 1795, the Thomson Bible 1808, The Revised Translation 1815, the Dickenson N.T. 1833, the Webster Bible 1833, the Pickering N.T. 1840, the Longman Version 1841, The Commonly Received Version 1851, the Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Revised N.T. 1862, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Dillard N.T. 1885, The Corrected English N.T. 1905, The Clarke N.T. 1913, the Riverside N.T. 1923, the New Life Version 1969, Good News Translation 1992, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Contemporary English Version 1995, The Revised Webster  Bible 1995 (Larry Pierce), God’s Word Translation 1995, the Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Complete Jewish Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The Last Days Bible 1999, the Tomson N.T. 2002, the New Century Version 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005 (Vince Garcia), The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Easy-to-Read Version 2006, Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the Names of God Bible 2011, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - “as YEHOSHUA  (יהושע) reclined at tish in LEVI’S house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with YEHOSHA  (יהושע) and His talmidim”, The Expanded Bible 2011, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, the New Living Translation 2013, the New International Reader’s Version 2014, the Modern English Version 2014, and The International Children’s Bible 2015.


Foreign Language Bibles 


Foreign language Bibles that have the word JESUS twice in Mark 2:15 are the Spanish Las Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, La Biblia de Las Américas 1997, the Reina Valera Gómez Bible 2010, and the Spanish Reina Valeras from 1909 to 2011, the Reina Valera Gómez 2010,  the French Martin Bible 1744 and the French Ostervald 1998,  the Danish Bibelen på hverdagsdansk (BPH) 2006, the Hungarian Easy to Read Version 2012, the Hawaii Pidgin Bible 2000 (Wycliffe Bible Translators), the Italian Conferenza Episcopale Italiana Bible, the Nederlands Het Boek 2007, the Portuguese Nova Traduҫão na Linguagem de Hoje 2000 and the Portuguese Easy to Read Bible 1999, the Quichua Mushuj Testamento Diospaj Shimi 2010, the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos Bible 1998, The Vietnamese Easy to Read Version 2010, the Chinese Union Traditional Bible, the Swedish Bible 1917 and the Swedish Nya Levande Bibeln (SVL) 2004, the Somaii Bible 2008, the Russian Synodal Bible, and the Russian Easy to Read Bible 2007,  the Albanian Bible, the Basque Navarro-Labourdin N.T., the Haitian-Creole Bible, the Indonesian Bahasa Seharihari Bible, and the Japanese Bungo-yaku/Taisho-kaiyaku Bible and the Romanian Fidela  Bible 2014 - "Și s-a întâmplat, pe când ISUS şedea la masă în casa lui Levi, că mulţi vameşi şi păcătoşi şedeau şi ei împreună cu ISUS şi discipolii lui; fiindcă erau mulţi şi îl urmau."


The King James Bible is right, as always. 

 

Mark 2:16 "And when the scribes and Pharisees say him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth AND DRINKETH with publicans and sinners?"

"he eateth AND DRINKETH with publicans and sinners" is the reading found in the Majority of all texts, including A, the Old Latin and the Syriac versions. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus differ from each other and so do the modern versions.

Vaticanus omits "and drinketh" (kai pinei) and so do the ESV, RSV, Holman Christian Standard, and NIV. Sinaiticus reads differently than all the others and it says: "but your teacher eats with publicans", adding "your teacher" and omitting "drinketh", but the versions don't follow Sinaiticus here. However the Revised Version, American Standard Version, the NASB and the ISV all reject the Vaticanus reading in this place and follow the KJB reading by saying: "Why is he eating AND DRINKING with publicans and sinners?". Notice the two newest versions differ from each other, with the Holman Standard omitting "drinks" and the ISV retaining it.

Mark 2:17 "When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners UNTO REPENTANCE."

So read the Majority of all texts including the Old Latin, but Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit "unto repentance" and so do the ESV, NASB, NIV.

I am not listing all the textual variants that occur in this short gospel of Mark, but just a few of them by way of example. A real mess occurs in Mark 3:14 to 16. In the King James Bible we read: "And he ordained twelve * that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach. And to have power TO HEAL SICKNESSES, and to cast out devils: * And Simon he surnamed Peter."

This again is the reading of the Majority of all Greek texts. However in verse 14 there are several additional words added in some modern versions not in others. The original Nestle-Aland texts did not add these extra words, but later on they changed again and added them. In the ESV and NIV we read: "And he appointed twelve (WHOM HE ALSO NAMED APOSTLES)". These extra words come from Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, yet not even the RV, ASV, NASB nor the Revised Standard Version contain this reading.

Then in verse 15 the words "to heal sicknesses" are omitted because not found in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and this time even the NASB, RV, and ASV follow the very texts they just rejected in the previous verse. So now the NASB, NIV and ESV all omit "to heal sicknesses" even though they are found in the Majority of all texts as well as the Old Latin and the Syriac versions.

Then again in verse 16 the ESV, NIV and NASB add these words from Sinaiticus and Vaticanus: "THEN HE APPOINTED THE TWELVE, and Simon he surnamed Peter." Yet these extra words are not found in the RV, ASV, nor even the RSV. These extra words are not found in the Majority of all Greek texts, nor Alexandrinus, nor the Old Latin nor the Syriac ancient versions.

If this all sounds confusing, that's because it IS confusing!


Mark 3:14 KJB (RV, ASV, NKJV) - “And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach”

  


ESV (NIV, NASB, NET, ISV, Jehovah Witness NWT,) - “And he appointed twelve (WHOM HE ALSO NAMED APOSTLES) so that they might be with him and he might send them out to preach”


Westcott and Hort originally added the words “WHOM HE ALSO NAMED APOSTLES” (οὓς καὶ ποστόλους ὠνόμασεν) to their text, though Tischendorf did not.  But not even the Revised Version 1885 nor the ASV 1901 nor even the RSV 1946-1971 included them in their translations.  


Later on the Nestle text 4th edition and the Nestle-Aland 21st edition 1975 removed them. But later on the Nestle-Aland text one again put them back in their ever evolving Critical text [but this time in brackets]

  

And many versions even today that are Critical Text Versions do NOT included these extra words. This is the true nature of the Musical Chairs Magical Mystery Tour they like to call the “science” of textual criticism.  


The reading found in the KJB and the Reformation Bibles that does NOT include the extra words “WHOM HE ALSO NAMED APOSTLES - οὓς καὶ ποστόλους ὠνόμασεν” is that of the Majority of all texts including A, C correction, the Old Latin a, or, c, d, ff2, i, l, E, F, G, H, K, L, P, Pi, Sigma, the Vulgate, Syriac Peshitta, Herclean, Gothic, Armenian and Slavonic ancient versions, as well as the Diatessaron 170 A.D.


The words are added by the usual suspects - Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.


Bible versions that DO NOT ADD these extra words “WHOM HE ALSO NAMED APOSTLES” even though many of them are critical Greek text versions are the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, New Life Version 1969, New Berkeley Version 1969, New English Bible 1970, Living Bible 1971, the Revised English Bible 1989,  The Common N.T. 1999, the Lexham English Bible 2012, the Amplified Version both 1987 and 2015 editions, Tyndale, Coverdale, The Great Bible, Matthew’s Bible, the Bishops’ Bible, the Geneva Bible, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, NKJV 1982, World English Bible 2000, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, The Pickering N.T. 2005, The Faithful N.T. 2009, The SBL (Society of Biblical Literature) Greek New Testament 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Conservative Bible 2010, The Aramaic N.T. 2011, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, The Modern English Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014,  The Hebrew Names Version 2014, and The New International Reader’s Version 2014.


Mark 3:29 "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal DAMNATION."

ESV (NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, Jehovah Witness NWT, all Catholic versions) - "but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of eternal SIN."

 

The reading of "is in danger of eternal DAMNATION" is found in the Majority of all texts, as well as A, C correction, E, F, G, H, K,M, S, U, V, Y, Gamma, Pi, Sigma, Phi, Omega, some Old Latin copies, the Syriac Peshitta, Harclean, Coptic Boharic, Ethiopian and Slavonic ancient versions.

However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus along with the RSV, ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman Standard, ISV, the Catholic Douay-Rheims 1582, Douay 1950, St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 and the Jehovah Witness New World Translation all read: "is in danger of eternal SIN."  

"SIN" is the reading found in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, D, L, W, Delta and Theta, some Old Latin, the Gothic and Armenian versions.  So the textual evidence is quite varied. God did not inspire both words in the same verse. Either one is right and the other is wrong, or they are both wrong, but they cannot both be right at the same time.

Eternal damnation I understand, but what exactly is an eternal sin?

 "IN DANGER OF ETERNAL DAMNATION"

 

Damnation is a very strong word and is found in Tyndale 1525, the Great Bible 1540 - "but is in daunger of eternall damnacyon", Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587,  The Beza N.T. 1599 - "eternal damnation", the Bill Bible 1671, Wesley's 1755 translation - "but is liable to eternal DAMNATION", Worsley Version 1770, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795, Webster's 1833 translation, The Commonly Received Version 1851, The Dillard N.T. 1885, The Clarke N.T. 1913, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century 1994, the Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Tomson N.T. 2002 - "eternal damnation", the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - "eternal damnation", Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), The Conservative Bible 2011 - "eternal damnation", the Natural Israelite Bible 2012, and The English Majority Text New Testament 2013 - "everlasting damnation." 

Other Bibles that follow the reading of "eternal damnation" or "eternal judgment" or "eternal condemnation" are Coverdale 1535, Mace N.T. 1729, the Thomson Bible 1808,  The Revised Translation 1815, The Pickering N.T. 1840, the Living Oracles 1835, The Longman Version 1841, the Morgan N.T. 1848, The Boothroyd Bible 1853 - "everlasting punishment",  the Julia Smith Translation 1855, the Emphatic Diaglot 1865, the Smith Bible 1876, The Revised English Bible 1877, The Sharpe Bible 1883, Young's 1898, Godbey N.T. 1902, the NKJV 1982, the Lawrie Translation 1998, Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Last Days Bible 1999, Complete Apostle's Bible 2003, Green's literal 2005, The Pickering N.T. 2005, the Jubilee Bible 2010, and the translations of the Syriac into English done by Lamsa, Etheridge and Murdock, The Aramaic N.T. 2011, The Far Above All Translation 2011, the World English Bible 2012, The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014.

 

Foreign Language Bibles

Foreign language Bibles that also follow the reading of "eternal DAMNATION" or "everlasting condemnation" are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valeras 1865 - 1995, the Spanish Reina Valera Gómez of 2004-2010 - "sino que está en peligro de condenación eterna.", the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 and French Louis Segond 2007 - "à une condamnation éternelle.", the Portuguese A Sagrada Biblia and Almeida Corrigida 2009 - "mas ser ru do eterno juzo", and the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991 -"ad eterno giudicio.", the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - "damnării eterne", Luther’s German Bible 1545 and the German Schlachter bible 2000 - “sondern ist schuldig des ewigen Gerichts.” = “eternal damnation”,

 

the Hungarian Karoli Bible - “hanem örök kárhozatra méltó”,  the Russian Synodal Version - “но подлежит он вечному осуждению.”, Smith & van Dyke’s Arabic bible - ولكن من جدّف على الروح القدس فليس له مغفرة الى الابد بل هو مستوجب دينونة, the Ukranian Bible - але гріху вічному він підпадає” = eternal damnation, the Maori Bible, and the Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013 - " ale podlega karze wiecznego potępienia." = "eternal damnation", The Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos Bible 1998 - Nanganganib siya sa walang hanggang kahatulan. = eternal damnation., the Czech BKR bible - “ale hoden jest věčného odsouzení” = eternal damnation, 

the Lithuanian Bible - "ir jis amžiams bus pasmerktas” = "will be forever doomed.”,

 

The Modern Greek Bible - αλλ' ειναι ενοχος αιωνιου καταδικης· = "but is in dander of ETERNAL CONDEMNATION"

 

And the Modern Hebrew Bible - אך המגדף את רוח הקדש אין לו סליחה לעולם כי יאשם בעונו לנצח׃


So, once again, it is a choice between the Reformation Bible text or the Vatican Versions.

 

Mark chapter four.

I will briefly list the words omitted by such versions as the RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV because of Sinaiticus/Vaticanus, but found in the Majority of all texts. The words not found in these versions are highlighted in capital letters.

Mark 4:4 "...and the fowls OF THE AIR came and devoured them."

Mark 4:11 "Unto you it is given TO KNOW the mystery of the kingdom of God."

Mark 4:12 "Lest at any time they should be converted, and THEIR SINS should be forgiven them."

Mark 4:15 "Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown IN THEIR HEARTS."

Mark 4:24 "and UNTO YOU THAT HEAR shall more be given."

Mark 5 relates the events of the man who had the unclean spirit and his healing. We are told that he lived among the tombs; had often been bound with fetters and chains, but he had broken these asunder and no man could tame him.

Mark 5:5 "And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and CUTTING HIMSELF with stones."

The RV, ASV, NKJV, KJB, and NIV all tell us he was CUTTING himself with stones. Even the NASB says he was "gashing himself" with stones, but the RSV, ESV say he was "BRUISING HIMSELF" with stones. This is a "minor change", but there is a difference in meaning. The Holman and ISV go back to "cutting himself with stones".

What is more significant is that this man, when he saw Jesus coming out of the ship, ran "AND WORSHIPPED HIM." Mark 5:6. The verb used here is the usual word for "worship" and is so translated by all versions many times. Those that read of this man coming to Jesus and worshipping Him are the RV, ASV, NKJV, Tyndale, Geneva, and even the RSV.

Matthew Henry remarks: "When he saw Jesus afar off, coming ashore, he ran, and worshipped him. He usually ran upon others with rage, but he ran to Christ with reverence... the poor man came, and worshipped Christ, in a sense of the need he had of his help, the power of Satan in and over him being, for this instant, suspended."

This devil possessed man recognized the Deity of Christ and worshipped Him as God. The passage also is sometimes looked at as though the unclean spirit recognized who Christ was and trembled before his Creator. Either way, the use of the term "worshipped him" implies His deity.

However the NASB, ESV say merely that he "BOWED DOWN TO him", while the NIV has: "he FELL ON HIS KNEES". The ISV says "he fell down in front of him." None of these is what the Greek texts say, and they downplay the recognized deity of the Lord Jesus.

 

Mark 6:11 KJB - "And WHOSOEVER shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRHA IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, THAN FOR THAT CITY."

ESV (NIV, NASB, NET, Catholic versions, Jehovah Witness NWT) - "And if ANY PLACE will not receive you and they will not listen to you, shake off the dust that is on your feet as a testimony against them." (ESV 2011)

The reading of "and WHOSOEVER (και οσοι αν) shall not receive you" is that of the majority of all texts, as well as A, C, D, 33 the Old Latin, Syriac, and even the Douay version.

But later Catholic versions are more like the NASB. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus change this to "and WHATSOEVER PLACE (και ος αν τοπος)  shall not hear you", and so read the NASB, RSV, ESV, NIV,  the Jehovah Witness NWT and the more modern Catholic versions like St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985.  

The difference is "and whosoever - και οσοι αν" versus "and whatsoever place -  και ος αν τοπος"  

Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta reads just like the King James Bible all through the whole verse.

Of greater concern is the whole latter part of this verse - "VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRHA IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, THAN FOR THAT CITY." 


 The NASB, ESV, NIV, NET, ISV, Holman, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation and ALL Catholic Version omit all these words because not found in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, C or D.

 

Yet they are in the Majority of all texts, including A plus the uncial copies E, F, G, H, K, M, N, S, U, V, Y, Pi, Sigma, Phi, Omega, as well as the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Harclean, some Coptic Boharic copies, the Gothic and Ethiopian ancient versions.  

These are the words that are omitted in the Vatican Versions - αμην λεγω υμιν ανεκτοτερον εσται σοδομοις η γομορροις εν ημερα κρισεως η τη πολει εκεινη = "VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRHA IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, THAN FOR THAT CITY."

 

All these words are found in Tyndale 1534 - "I saye verely vnto you it shalbe easyer for Zodom and Gomor at the daye of iudgement then for that cite.", Coverdale, 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley's N.T. 1755, Worsley Version 1770, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795, The Thomson Bible 1808, Webster's 1833, the Longman Version 1841, Hussey N.T. 1845, Morgan N.T. 1848, The Commonly Received Version 1851, Julia Smith Bible 1855, The Revised N.T. 1862, Smith Bible 1876, Young's 1898, New Life Version 1969, New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Worldwide English N.T. 1998, Last Days Bible 1999, God's First Truth 1999, The Complete Apostle's Bible 2003, Green's Literal 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, The Pickering N.T. 2005,  Concordant Version 2006, Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, Far Above All Translation 2011, The Aramaic N.T. 2011, Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Natural Israelite Bible 2012, World English Bible 2012, the Hebraic Roots Bible 2012,  English Majority Text New Testament 2013, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014 and the Modern English Version 2014 - "Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the Day of Judgment than for that city.”

 

The Modern Greek Bible - Αληθως σας λεγω, ελαφροτερα θελει εισθαι η τιμωρια εις τα Σοδομα η Γομορρα εν ημερα κρισεως, παρα εις την πολιν εκεινην.  

 

And the Modern Hebrew Bible - וכל אשר לא יקבלו אתכם ולא ישמעו אליכם צאו משם ונערו את עפר כפות רגליכם לעדות להם אמן אני אמר לכם לסדם ולעמרה יקל ביום הדין מן העיר ההיא׃

 

Some Critical text versions are starting to put these words back in the text.  Among these are  the Amplified Version 1987 and The Voice of 2012.  

 

Foreign Language Bibles

 

Foreign language Bibles that contain all these words are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602 and the Reina Valeras 1909 to 2011 - "De cierto les digo que, en el día del juicio, el castigo para los de Sodoma y Gomorra será más tolerable que para aquella ciudad.", Luther's German bible 1545 and the German Schlachter bible 2000 - "Wahrlich, ich sage euch: Es wird Sodom und Gomorra erträglicher gehen am Tag des Gerichts als jener Stadt!", the French Martin 1744, Ostervald 1996 and the French Louis Second 2006 - "“Je vous le dis en vérité, le jour du jugement, Sodome et Gomorrhe seront traitées moins sévèrement que cette ville-là.”, the Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Riveduta 2006 - "In verità vi dico che nel giorno del giudizio Sodoma e Gomorra saranno trattate con piú tolleranza che quella città.", the Updated Polish Gdansk Bible 2013 - "Zaprawdę powiadam wam: Lżej będzie Sodomie i Gomorze w dzień sądu niż temu miastu.", the Portuguese Almeida Corregida 2009 - "Em verdade vos digo que haverá mais tolerância no Dia do Juízo para Sodoma e Gomorra do que para os daquela cidade." the Hungarian Károli bible, the Russian Synodal Version, Afrikaans Bible 1953, Dutch Staten Vertaling bible, Czech BKR bible, and the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos Bible 1998 - "Higit na mabigat ang parusa sa lungsod na iyon kaysa sa parusa sa Sodoma at Gomora sa araw ng paghuhukom." 

So we see that once again it is the difference between the Reformation text of the Bible and the Vatican Versions.

 

Mark 6:14 "And king Herod heard of him: (for his name was spread abroad:) and HE SAID, That John the Baptist was risen from the dead."

The reading of HE SAID is that of the Majority as well as Sinaiticus, A, and C. Even the Revised Version and the ASV followed this reading, as well as the Catholic Douay version and now the ISV does too. However only Vaticanus and a couple of other minor copies read "THEY SAID", and the NASB has "PEOPLE were saying", while the ESV, NIV, and the other new Holman Christian Standard have "Some said". The more modern Catholic versions have also changed this to "Some said". Then in a misleading footnote they tell us "SOME early copies read 'he said' ". How about all copies and many ancient versions read "he said", except 2 or 3. This would be a tad more truthful.

Just wait a second and you will see how "reliable" our "oldest and best" copies really are.

Mark 6:20 "For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and OBSERVED HIM; and when he heard him, HE DID MANY THINGS, and heard him gladly.

There are two problems with this verse in the new versions. First of all, James White criticizes the translation of "observed him", and the NKJV goes along with the NASB, NIV, ESV by saying "he protected him".

You can see my article about this at: http://brandplucked.webs.com/turtleobservedpineth.htm

There I deal with three of James White's criticisms of the KJB. The Turtle, Observed, and Pineth Away.

The second problem with this verse is the reading of "he did many things". This is the reading found in the Majority of all texts including A, C, and D, the Old Latin and the Syriac ancient versions. It is even the reading of the Douay version, and that of the NKJV, Tyndale, Geneva, etc., and now the brand new ISV (International Standard Version) has gone back to this reading too, but the Holman Christian Standard does not.

However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus read differently with "he was much perplexed" and so read the NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV, and the more modern Catholic versions like the New Jerusalem.

 

Mark 6:22 - The Daughter of Herodias or Herod's daughter Herodias? - The Ever Changing Lunacy of Modern Textual Criticism


And we can always count of "Scholar Clown" Daniel B. Wallace to come through for the Vatican as well. 


In Mark 6:22 we read: "And when the daughter OF the said HERODIAS (mentioned in verses 17 and 19) came in, and danced, and pleased Herod...the king said...Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee." 

Common English Bible 2011 - "Herod’s daughter Herodias came in and danced...

Dan Wallace's NET version - "WHEN HIS DAUGHTER HERODIAS came in and danced, she pleased Herod..."

The 2003 Holman Standard reads: "When Herodias’s own daughter[a] came in and danced..."

And then footnotes - Mark 6:22 Other mss read "When HIS DAUGHTER HERODIAS"

In the Lexham English Bible 2012 we see the same thing. It rejects the latest “scholarship” of the UBS/Nestle-Aland editors and goes with Traditional reading of the KJB. 

 

It says: And when THE DAUGHTER OF HERODIAS HERSELF came in and danced and pleased Herod and his dinner guests, the king said to the girl, “Ask me for whatever you want, and I will give it to you.”  

 

Then it footnotes: In place of “the daughter of Herodias herself” some manuscripts have “his daughter Herodias”. And what exactly are these “some manuscripts”?  They are our old “friends” Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Two of the most corrupt manuscripts to see the light of day, that not only contradict the Traditional Text of the Reformation Bibles but contradict each other literally thousands of times.

 

To see the true nature of these so called “oldest and best manuscripts” upon which most modern Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, the Jehovah Witness NWT and the modern Catholic versions are based, see my article here -


http://brandplucked.webs.com/oldestandbestmss.htm

 

Herodias was previously the wife of Phillip, the brother of Herod, and she had a daughter by Phillip.  At some point Herod took Herodias, his brother's wife, to be his own and John the Baptist reproved Herod for this. "For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Phillip's wife; for he had married her. For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife." Mark 6:17-18.

Matthew 14:6 clearly tells us: "But when Herod's birthday was kept, THE DAUGHTER OF HERODIAS danced before them, and pleased Herod."

The reading that repeats the information and tells us that this girl who danced at Herod's birthday party was THE DAUGHTER OF HERODIAS is that of the Majority of all Greek texts as well as Alexandrinus and C.

However the so called "oldest and best manuscripts" of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus actually say that this was Herod's daughter named Herodias, instead of saying that it was Herodias' daughter and not mentioning her name.

Obviously the two readings cannot both be inspired by God at the same time, and the reading found here in Mark 6:22 in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus (the so called oldest and best upon which most modern versions are based) obviously contradicts what Matthew 14:6 tells us about this girl being "the daughter of Herodias".

Part of what makes this obvious textual blunder of such interest is to see how the critical text "scholars" have dealt with it. The textual differences are quite obvious in the Greek. The Traditional Greek text and that of almost every Bible version in all languages in history that tells us this was the daughter of Herodias is "τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς Ἡρῳδιάδος " whereas the Vatican mss. reads  "τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ἡρῳδιάδος" = HIS DAUGHTER HERODIAS.

 

THE CONSTANTLY CHANGING CRITICAL TEXT EDITIONS 

 

Westcott and Hort originally adopted this strange variant reading because of their blind devotion to the Vatican manuscript, but not even the Revised Version of 1885 or the ASV of 1901 followed this strange and contradictory reading, but stayed with the traditional - "when THE DAUGHTER OF HERODIAS HERSELF came in and danced".


However later on the Nestle critical Greek text 4th edition 1934 and the Nestle 21st edition of 1975 both read like the King James Bible and the traditional Greek text. They did NOT adopt the Vatican/Sinaitic reading. 

But then again the latest Nestle-Aland critical Greek texts 27th and the most recent 28th edition have once again changed their Greek text and have gone back to the one first followed by Westcott and Hort. The most recent Nestle Aland critical Greek texts now read "HIS DAUGHTER HERODIAS" =  τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτοῦ Ἡρῳδιάδος

We can see part of this fickle change in the RSV, NRSV and the revision of the revision of the revision called the ESV.  The RSV read -" For when HERODIAS' DAUGHTER CAME IN" but the NRSV of 1989 said: "WHEN HIS DAUGHTER HERODIAS came in and danced," and then the ESV 2011 went back to reading: For when HERODIAS'S DAUGHTER came in and danced..."  

This means that the ESV, along with the NIV and NASB are not even following the latest musical chairs reading found in the last few printings of the "updated" UBS/Nestle-Aland critical text editions.

Agreeing with the correct reading that this was "the daughter of Herodias" and not "Herod's daughter Herodias" are  Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the  Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the RV 1885, ASV 1901 - "when the daughter of Herodias herself came in and danced", Living Bible 1971, NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard 2009, NKJV 1982, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, Easy-to-Read Version 2006, the ISV 2014.

 Those following the corrupt Vaticanus-Sinaiticus, United Bible Society/Vatican/Nestle-Aland 28th edition and that tell us this girl was Herod's daughter and her name was Herodias are Daniel Wallace and company's NET version, the latest critical text version called The Common English Version of 2011, the NRSV of 1989, The New Living Translation 2007, and the Disciples New Literal N.T. 2011.

The Living Bible 1971 followed the Traditional text, but this latest "update" has now gone for this blunder found in the Vatican manuscripts.

 

The New Living Translation 2007 now says: - "Then HIS DAUGHTER, ALSO NAMED HERODIAS, came in and performed a dance".  

 

Since the ever changing critical text scholars have lately adopted this obvious blunder as their preferred Greek text I suppose we will see some more in the future.

 

Additional textual differences in this chapter are:

Mark 6:33 "And the people saw them departing, and many knew HIM (referring to Jesus)...AND CAME TOGETHER UNTO HIM."

"HIM" is the Majority reading again, but Vaticanus omits the word, while Sinaiticus has "THEM" and so read the NASB, NIV, ESV. The words "and came together unto him" are omitted in the NASB, NIV, ESV because not in Sin/Vat, but they are in the Majority texts.

Mark 6:36 "Send them away, that they may go into the country round about, and into the villages, and buy themselves BREAD: FOR THEY HAVE NOTHING TO EAT."

This is the Majority reading as well as Alexandrinus, and the NKJV, but Sinaiticus and Vaticanus differ even from each other. Sinaiticus says "buy some foods to eat" and omits "for they have nothing to eat", while Vaticanus says "buy something to eat" and omits the latter phrase. The NIV, RSV, NASB, ESV follow the Vaticanus reading here.

Mark 6:51 "And he went up unto them into the ship; and the wind ceased: and they were sore amazed in themselves BEYOND MEASURE, AND WONDERED."

So read the majority of texts as well as A and D, but Sinaiticus, Vaticanus omit "beyond measure and wondered", and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV. In fact, even though the words "in themselves" are found in their own texts, the NASB, NIV, and ESV have omitted these as well.

Mark 7:2 "And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, THEY FOUND FAULT."

"THEY FOUND FAULT" is in the Majority of all texts as well as the Syriac and the Douay version, but Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and A omit these words and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV. Though "they found fault" is in the Catholic Douay version, the later Catholic versions now omit these words too.

Mark 7:4 "...And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, AND OF TABLES."

This is another case of constant change among the versions. The previous Nestle text omitted these words because not in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and so are omitted in the NASB, NIV. BUT the Nestle text has added them back in and the newer ISV, Holman Standard, and the ESV now include them! The NKJV gives an erroneous reading of "couches", even though the context is things they washed, while the ISV has "dinner tables".

Mark 7:8 "For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, AS THE WASHING OF POTS AND CUPS: AND MANY OTHER SUCH LIKE THINGS YE DO."

This whole last part is found in the Majority, and Alexandrinus, the Syriac, and even the Douay version, but the NASB, NIV, ESV omit all these words because not in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus. The later Catholic versions now omit them too.

Mark 7:16 "IF ANY MAN HAVE EARS TO HEAR, LET HIM HEAR."

This entire verse is found in the Majority, A, D, Old Latin, Lamsa's Syriac translation, and the Douay version, but Sin-Vat omit it and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV. But wait, the Holman Christian Standard has now put the verse back in the text, but not the ISV!

Mark 7:18-19 Here a big change in the meaning of the verse occurs because of the corrupt manuscripts followed by most modern versions.

In the King James Bible, as well as Tyndale, Geneva and the earlier versions we read: "...whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him: Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, AND GOETH OUT INTO THE DRAUGHT, PURGING ALL MEATS."

The simple meaning of the verse is that the food (meats) goes into the belly, and then goes into the toilet (draught), and in this way the wastes are purged from the body.

John Gill comments: "but into the belly; - it is taken in at the mouth, goes down the throat, and is received into the stomach, and from thence it passes through the bowels: and goeth into the draught;- "the private house", as the Jews call it, without going into the heart at all: purging all meats; - that which it leaves behind, is pure and nourishing; and whatever is gross and impure, is carried with it into the draught, so that nothing remains in the man that is defiling."

"goeth out into the draught" is what all Greek texts say (eis ton aphedroona ekporeuetai), and the "archaic word" draught (pronounced draft), is found in the RV, ASV, Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishop's, Geneva, Darby, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible, and Webster's 1833 translation. Other versions like Young's, Douay, and Third Millenium Bible say "goeth into the drain." The Hebrew Names Version says "goes into the latrine".

The NKJV has paraphrased this expression and added the word "thus" which is not found in any text. In this way it slants itself toward the meaning found in the NIV, NASB. The NKJV reads: "and IS ELIMINATED, thus purifying all foods."

However, the NASB, NIV, ESV have followed a different reading found in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and have added words to even their own Greek texts in order to have the verse make sense. Yet the resultant meaning is very different from that of the KJB and others.

The ESV says: "Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart, but his stomach, and is expelled? (THUS HE DECLARED ALL FOODS CLEAN.)

The NIV is similar with "it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach and then out of his body. IN SAYING THIS, JESUS DECLARED ALL FOODS CLEAN."

Both these versions have added several words not found in any text, and have totally changed the meaning of what the Lord said. That foods are cleansed from the body by the natuaral process of digestion, OR that Jesus declared all foods clean, are NOT the same thing. Both readings cannot be what God inspired.

To see a much fuller article on this verse, please go to the article on this verse here -

http://brandplucked.webs.com/mk719draftpurgingmeats.htm 

Mark 7:22 Here the Lord is telling us what evil things come out of the heart of man and defile him. Among these things listed are: "wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, AN EVIL EYE, blasphemy..."

All Greek texts read the same here with "an evil eye" (Ofthalmos poneros). This is literally what the text says and so read the KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Young's, Darby, Geneva and several others. However beginning with the RSV, and now in the NASB, NIV, ESV, they have changed this to "ENVY".

An evil eye is not the same thing as envy. There are many passages in both testaments that speak of an evil eye, and in none of them is it referring to envy. According to Webster's dictionary, an evil eye is a glance held to be capable of inflicting harm or injury because of the malice of the person looking. The primary motive of an evil eye is malice, not envy.

Here is just one of the many uses of this phrase - "an evil eye". Deuteronomy 15:9 "Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying, The seventh year, the year of release, is at hand; and THINE EYE BE EVIL against thy poor brother, and thou givest him not..."

The intent is malice, not envy. Not only have the NASB, NIV, ESV, RSV mistranslated the words here but have missed the intended meaning.

Mark 7:24 "And from thence he arose, and went into the borders of Tyre AND SIDON."

"AND SIDON" is found in the Majority as well as Sinaticus and Vaticanus, but not in D. The Revised Version, ASV, RSV, the new ESV, Holman Standard, and ISV include these words, but the NASB, NIV, NRSV omit them. Go Figure.

Mark 8:21 and 23. The two examples here may be considered by some to be minor in nature, but they reveal the fickleness of modern translators in going back and forth between the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus readings when these two disagree with each other.

In Mark 8:21 the reading of the Majority of texts, the Textus Receptus and Vaticanus is: "And he said unto them, HOW IS IT that ye do NOT understand?" (pws ou). So reads the NKJV, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, and all previous English versions based on the TR. But Sinaiticus reads "NOT YET" (oupw) instead of "how is it ye do not", and the NASB, NIV, ESV here reject the Vaticanus reading and go with Sinaiticus.

They read "Do you NOT YET understand?"

But then when we get to Mark 8:23 and the Lord begins to heal the blind man by spitting on his eyes and laying His hands on him, "he asked him IF HE SAW OUGHT." This again is the reading found in the Majority of all texts, the Syriac Peshitta, Alexandrinus and Sinaiticus. Even the Douay version reads as does the KJB - (ei ti blepei). But Vaticanus reads differently with one letter being added that changes the subject of the sentence from third person (he) to second person (you).

The NASB, NIV, ESV this time reject the Sinaiticus reading they had followed in verse 21, and now reverse themselves and follow Vaticanus, which says: "he asked him, Do YOU SEE anything?"

Mark 8:26 "And he sent him away to his house, saying, Neither go into the town, NOR TELL IT TO ANY IN THE TOWN."

These last few words "nor tell it to any in the town" again are found in the Majority of all texts, as well as Alexandrinus and C, the Syriac Peshitta, and even the Douay version. However both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV, and Holman Standard. But wait! The new ISV has put this phrase back in their bible version!

Mark 9:23 In the context of this verse, a man had brought his son, who had been tormented by a dumb spirit from a child, to Jesus and His disciples to be healed. The man says: "And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire, and into the waters, to destroy him: but if thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and help us."

verse 23 "Jesus said unto him, If thou canst BELIEVE, all things are possible to him that believeth."

The new versions based on the Westcott-Hort text have created a very awkward sentence that disconnects from the natural flow of the passage, and they don't even agree among themselves on how to translate it. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus both omit the word "believe", even though this word is found in the Majority of all Greek texts, including A, C, D, 33, the Old Latin, Syriac, and even the Douay version.

After the father of the boy says "but if thou canst do any thing, help us" the NASB, ESV have: "And Jesus said to him, IF YOU CAN! (exclamation point) All things are possible for one who believes." The NIV and the ISV have: "IF YOU CAN? said Jesus. (question mark) Everything is possible for him who believes."

Mark 9:24 "And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said WITH TEARS, LORD, I believe; help thou mine unbelief."

Here the words "with tears" and "Lord" are found in the majority of all Greek texts, but because Sin-Vat omit them, so do the NASB, NIV, ESV. However the new ISV has now put "with tears" back in the text, but it still omits the word "Lord".

Mark 9:29 "And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer AND FASTING."

The words "and fasting" again are in the Majority texts, as well as Sinaiticus correction, C, D, and P45 which predates them all. The words are also found in the Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and the Douay version.

Yet because Vaticanus omits them, the NASB, NIV, ESV also omit "with fasting". But now the new Holman Christian Standard has put "with fasting" back in the text but in brackets, while the ISV again includes "with fasting" and no brackets.

Mark 9:41 "For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink IN MY NAME, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward."

This is a peculiar example of corruption in some texts and versions. The words "in my name" are found in the Majority of texts, as well as Sinaiticus original, D, the Old Latin, the NIV, and the Holman Christian Standard !

However Vaticanus contains the words "in name" but omits the word "my". The NASB says: "whoever gives you a cup of water to drink BECAUSE OF YOUR NAME (as followers) of Christ...he shall not lose his reward." There is no word "your" in any text.

But the ESV and the ISV disagree with both the NASB, and NIV, and omits even the word "name" (onomati) by saying: "whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ will by no means lose his reward."

Mark 9:42 "And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe IN ME, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea."

The words IN ME are found in the majority of texts and Vaticanus. They are also in the RV, ASV, RSV, ESV, and NIV. However, Sinaiticus omits "in me" and so does the NASB!

Mark 9:44 "WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED."

This entire verse is found in the majority of all texts, as well as A, D, the Syriac, Old Latin and even in the Douay version. But the NASB, NIV, ESV omit it because not in the Sin-Vat manuscripts. But wait, the ISV and the Holman Standard put the verse back in the text!

Mark 9:45 "...it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED."

These last words are in the majority of texts, A, D, the Old Latin and Syriac Harkelian, but are omitted from the NASB, NIV, ESV, because of the usual suspects. This time the ISV still omits these words, but the Holman Christian Standard puts them back in the text!

Mark 9:46 "WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED." Again, same as verse 44, found in most texts and versions, but omitted by the NASB, NIV, ESV. But again the ISV and the Holman Standard have put this whole verse back in the text.

Mark 9:49 KJB - "For every one shall be salted with fire, AND EVERY SACRIFICE SHALL BE SALTED WITH SALT."

These last words are again in the Majority of texts, including A, C, D, the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, some Coptic, the Slavonic, the Gothic and the Ethiopian ancient versions as well as the Diatessaron 170 A. D.

But again, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV, NET, the Jehovah Witness NWT and the Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 and New Jerusalem bible 1995.

But now the ISV 2014 (International Standard Version) has included these words in the text once again, but the Holman Standard 2009 still omits them.

  

The Catholic Connection 

The previous Douay-Rheims 1582 and the Douay Version 1950 both contain all these words. But the Catholic St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 omit them and read like the ESV, NIV, NASB.

But not to worry. Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain version as well as The Revised Douay-Rheims 2012 have come out, and once again they include all these words. 

 

Mark 9:49 KJB - "For every one shall be salted with fire, AND EVERY SACRIFICE SHALL BE SALTED WITH SALT." 

 Agreeing with the KJB and including all these words are the Anglo-Saxon Gospels 990 A.D. - Soðlice ælc man bið mid fyre ge-sylt & ælc offrung bið mid sealte gesylt”, Wycliffe Bible 1395, Tyndale 1534, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Douay-Rheims 1582, the Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley N.T. 1755, Worsley Version 1770, Haweis N.T. 1795, the Thomson Bible 1808, The Revised Translation 1815, Living Oracles 1835, The Pickering N.T. 1840, The Commonly Received Version 1851, Sawyer N.T. 1858, The Revised N.T. 1862, American Bible Union N.T. 1865, The Alford N.T. 1870, the Smith Bible 1876, Young’s 1898, the Clarke N.T. 1913, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, the Lawrie Translation 1998, the Koster Scriptures 1998, Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Last Days Bible 1999, God’s First Truth 1999, Tomson N.T. 2002, Complete Apostle’s Bible 2003, Green’s literal 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, The Pickering N.T. 2005, Concordant Version 2006, Jubilee Bible 2010, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), the Conservative Bible 2011, The Aramaic N.T. 2011, the Far Above All Translation 2011, The Work of God’s Children Bible 2011, World English Bible 2012, the Bond Slave Version 2012, The Hebrew Roots Bible 2012, The Voice 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014, The Translator’s Bible 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014.  


It is also found in The Modern Greek Bible - Διοτι πας τις με πυρ θελει αλατισθη, και πασα θυσια με αλας θελει αλατισθη.


Foreign Language Bibles


Just to name a few, all these words are found in the Spanish Reina Valera 1995, the French Martin bible 1744, Ostervald 1998 and French Louis Segond 2007, The Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Italian Riveduta Bible 2006, the Hungarian Karoli Bible, the Czech BKR bible, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009, Luther’s German bible 1545 and the German Schlachter Bible 2000, the Russian Synodal Bible, the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos Bible 1998, the Dutch Staten Vertaling bible, and the Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013.


 

Mark 10:16-26 Amazing inconsistency in the Modern Versions!

Mark 10:6 "But from the beginning of the creation GOD made them male and female."

The word GOD is found in the Majority of all texts, including A and D. However both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit this word and so does the UBS, Nestle Greek text. The Revised Version and the American Standard Version also omit this word.

BUT, the word GOD is included in the NASB (italics), and now back in the texts of the NIV, and ESV.

Mark 10:7 - "For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, AND CLEAVE UNTO HIS WIFE."

The fickleness of the modern versionists is seen in how they deal with the textual issues of this verse. The words "and cleave unto his wife" are found in the the vast Majority of all Greek texts as well as A, C, D, the Old Latin, Vulgate, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Gorgian, Slavonic and Ethiopic ancient versions.

However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit all these words, and so did Westcott-Hort and the previous Nestle-Aland critical texts. But now once more they have changed their minds and put these words back into their Greek text but {within brackets}.

Basically the only versions that OMIT all these words are the NASB and Daniel Wallace's NET version.

The Bible versions that contain the words "and cleave unto his wife" are the following: Geneva, Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops', the Revised Version, American Standard Version 1901, Weymouth, Youngs, Darby, Spanish Reina Valera, the NKJV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman, NIV, TNIV and the brand new ISV.

Mark 10:21 "...sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor: and come, TAKE UP THE CROSS, and follow me."

 

The words "take up the cross" (αρας τον σταυρον) are in the Majority of all texts, and Alexandrinus, E, F, H, K, M,  N, S, U, V, W, X, Y, Gamma, Pi, Sigma, Phi, Omega as well as the Syriac Peshitta, Sinaitic and Harclean, Coptic, Gothic, Slavonic ancient versions and some Old Latin copies.

 

But the Vatican critical text versions like the Catholic Douay-Rheims, Douay, St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation, the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, NET, Holman omit them because not in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, C, D or the Latin Vulgate nor the Clementine Vulgate.  

 

The words "and come, TAKE UP THE CROSS, and follow me." are found in Tyndale 1525 - “come and folowe me and take vp thy crosse.”, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - “and come, followe me, and take vp the crosse.”, The Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795, Webster’s translation 1833, Living Oracles 1835, The Pickering N.T. 1840, Etheridge 1849, Murdock’s 1852 and Lamsa’s 1933 translations of the Syriac Peshitta, the Aramaic Bible in Plain English, Julia Smith translation 1855, The Sawyer N.T. 1858, The Revised N.T. 1862, The Alford N.T. 1870, The Revised English Bible 1877, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, James Moffatt translation 1926, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, The Lawrie Translation 1998, The Worldwide English N.T. 1998, God's First Truth Translation 1999, The Last Days Bible 1999, The World English Bible 2000, The Tomson N.T. 2002, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012, Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Apostolic Bible Polyglot Greek 2003 - “come follow me, taking up the cross.”, The Pickering N.T. 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, the 2005 Complete Apostle’s Bible - “come, TAKE UP THE CROSS, and follow me.”, the Mebust Bible 2007, the New Heart English Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Conservative Bible 2010, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Modern Literal New Testament 2014 and The Modern English Bible 2014.

 

Foreign Language Bibles


A multitude of foreign language Bibles contain the words “TAKE UP THE CROSS” including Luther’s German bible 1545 and the German Schlachter Bible 2000 - “und komm, folge mir nach und nimm das Kreuz auf dich.”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1549, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Reina Valera 1909 1995 - “y ven, sígueme, tomando tu cruz.”, the French Martin Bible 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and Louis Segond 2007 - “et me suis, ayant chargé la croix.”, the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués - “toma a cruz, e segue-me.”,the Italian Diodati 1646, Nuova Diodati 1991 and La Nuova Riveduta 2007 - “prendi la tua croce e seguimi”.”,  the Afrikaans Bible 1953 - “kom dan hier, neem die kruis op en volg My.”, Finnish Bible 1776 - “ja tule, seuraa minua, ottain risti.”, Czech BKR - “a pojď, následuj mne, vezma kříž svůj.”, the Russian Synodal Bible - “и приходи, последуй за Мною, взяв крест.”, the Romanian Cornilescu Bible and the 2014 Romanian Fidela Bible - “Apoi vino, ia-ţi crucea, şi urmează-Mă.”, the Hungarian Karoli Bible - “ kövess engem, felvévén a keresztet.”, the Dutch Staten Vertaling - “en kom herwaarts, neem het kruis op, en volg Mij.”,  the 1998 Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos Bible - “Pagkatapos pumarito ka, pasanin mo ang krus at sumunod ka sa akin.”,the Smith and van Dyke Arabic bible - الفقراء فيكون لك كنز في السماء وتعال اتبعني حاملا الصليب.,

 

the Modern Greek Bible - “σηκωσας τον σταυρον.”

 

and the Modern Hebrew Bible - אשר לך ותן לעניים ויהי לך אוצר בשמים ובוא שא את הצלב ולך אחרי׃



Mark 10:24 - "...But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it FOR THEM THAT TRUST IN RICHES to enter the kingdom of God."

Brother Marty Shue has written an excellent article dealing with this verse. It can be found at his King James Bible defense site here:  http://www.avdefense.webs.com/terribly.html

 


Mark 10:24 - "...But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it FOR THEM THAT TRUST IN RICHES to enter the kingdom of God.”

ESV - “…But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God!”

 

 

“FOR THEM THAT TRUST IN RICHES” - This is the reading found in the Majority of all Greek texts including Alexandrinus, D and C, the Old Latin copies aur, b, d, f, ff2, l and q which witness to a text written long before Sinaiticus and Vaticanus saw the light of day, the Latin Vulgate of 382 A.D. and 425 A.D., the Syriac Peshitta, Harclean, Sinaitic, the Coptic Boharic, Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Georgian and Slavonic ancient versions.

The first major English version to come out that omitted these words was the liberal RSV of 1952. Not even the previous "revisions" based on the Westcott-Hort critical text went along with this innovation. The Revised Version of 1881 and the American Standard Version of 1901 BOTH kept these words in their English texts - "Children, how hard is it FOR THEM THAT TRUST IN RICHES to enter into the kingdom of God!"

The whole meaning of the passage is radically changed when omitted by such versions as the NASB, NIV 1984 and 2011 editions, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NET, Jehovah Witness New World Translation, Common English Bible and Holman Standard. 

They end up saying: "Children, how hard is it to enter the kingdom of God." It is not hard at all; we enter the kingdom by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. The NIV 1978 edition (I have a hard copy of it) said: "How hard it is FOR THE RICH to enter the kingdom of God." But then they removed these words in the 1984 edition.  

The 2011 NIV edition now says: “…But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God.”


"FOR THEM THAT TRUST IN RICHES"

The phrase "for them that trust in riches" is also found in the following Bible translations: the Anglo Saxon Gospels 990 A.D., Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549 - “chyldren howe harde is it for them, that truste in rychesse, to enter into the kyngdome of God.”, Bishops’ Bible 1568, Douay-Rheims 1582, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley's N.T. 1755, the Living Oracles 1835, The Pickering N.T. 1840, The Sawyer N.T. 1858, The Revised N.T. 1862, The Alford N.T. 1870, The Revised English Bible 1877, Darby 1890, Young’s 1898, Weymouth 1903, The Clarke N.T. 1913, Douay 1950, James Moffatt's N.T. 1913, the New Life Bible 1969, Bible in Basic English 1960, the New Berkeley Version in Modern Speech 1969, the NKJV 1982, The Recovery N.T. 1985, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Laurie Translation 1998, The Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Last Days Bible 1999, God's First Truth Translation 1999, World English Bible 2000, Green's MKJV 2000, The Yah Sacred Scriptures 2001, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Pickering N.T. 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T 2005, The Mebust Bible 2007, The Faithful N.T. 2009, The Conservative Bible 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Bible 2010, the Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2010, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010 -"how hard for them that trust in riches", The Work of God's Children Bible 2011, the Knox Bible of 2012, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The English Majority Text 2013, The Far Above All Translation 2014, Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Modern English Version 2014, and The Modern Literal New Testament 2014. 

Foreign Language Bibles

It is also found in a multitude of foreign language Bibles including Luther's German bible 1545 and the 2000 Schlachter Bible, the French Martin 1744, Ostervald 1996 and the Louis Segond of 2007 -"Mes enfants, qu'il est difficile à ceux qui se confient dans les richesses d'entrer dans le royaume de Dieu!", the Portuguese Almeida and A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués, the Portuguese O Livro of 2000 - "Filhos, quão difícil é, para os que confiam nas riquezas, entrar no reino de Deus!", the Spanish Reina Valera 1995 and R.V. Gómez 2010 - "Hijos, ¡cuán difícil les es entrar en el reino de Dios a los que confían en las riquezas!", the Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991 and the 2006 Nuova Riveduta Bible - "Figli, quanto è difficile, per coloro che confidano nelle ricchezze entrare nel regno di Dio."

and the Modern Greek Bible - “Τεκνα, ποσον δυσκολον ειναι να εισελθωσιν εις την βασιλειαν του Θεου οι εχοντες το θαρρος αυτων εις τα χρηματα”

and the Modern Hebrew Bible - “ויבהלו התלמידים על דבריו ויסף ישוע ויען ויאמר להם בני מה קשה לבטחים על חילם לבוא אל מלכות האלהים׃”

What is funny to see is how even some of the more modern versions that usually follow the UBS/Nestle-Aland critical Greek texts (which completely omit these words from their text)  are now rejecting the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus readings here and are going back to the Traditional text used in the King James Bible. 

The Amplified bible of 1987, which is put out by the same Lockman Foundation that prints the NASB, includes the phrase "those who trust in riches", and the ISV (International Standard Version) of 2012 as well as The Voice of 2012.  Even though the ISV and the Voice usually follow the critical texts they have now put these words back into the text where they belong reading: "Children, how hard it is FOR THOSE WHO TRUST IN THEIR WEALTH to get into the kingdom of God!” 

Eugene Peterson’s horrible paraphrase called the Message of 2002, which almost always follows the UBS critical Greek text, includes the phrase, but paraphrases it as it does almost everything else.  It says: “Jesus said, “Do you have any idea how difficult it is FOR PEOPLE WHO ‘HAVE IT ALL’ to enter God’s kingdom?”  

The Catholic Connection

As usual, we see the same thing happening in the Catholic versions. The older Douay-Rheims of 1582 and the Douay of 1950 both contain the words "for them that trust in riches" but the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 omit it, just like the new Vatican Versions ESV, NIV, NASB, NET.

BUT now in the 2009 Catholic Public Domain version they have put these words back in the text and once again it reads: " “Little sons, how difficult it is FOR THOSE WHO TRUST IN MONEY to enter into the kingdom of God!"

"Scholarship" is an amazing thing to behold, isn't it. 

 

Mark 10:26 Who's talking to whom?

In Mark 10:26 we read: "And they were astonished out of measure, saying AMONG THEMSELVES, Who then can be saved?"

So read the Majority text, Alexandrinus, D ( codex Bezae), the Old Latin, Syriac, and the Gothic ancient versions. Agreeing with the reading of "among themselves" are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1687, Wesley 1755, Weymouth 1913, and today we have in more modern times the NKJV 1982, NIV 1984, TNIV 2005, Holman Standard 2003, and the brand new 2006 ISV (International Standard Version) that isn't even finished yet.

However when Westcott and Hort first came out with their totally revised N.T. Greek, they originally followed the very different reading found in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, though later on in the 4th edition of the Nestle-Aland text, and today in the 27th edition they decided to go back to the reading found in the King James Bible.

The versions that still follow this very different reading of W-H, but is not even the text of the latest Nestle-Aland editions are the NASB, RSV, NRSV and the 2001 ESV. In these versions we read: "And they were even more astonished and said TO HIM (not "among themselves"), Then who can be saved?" (NASB).

This is just one more of literally hundreds of examples of where the modern versionists are in disagreement among themselves as to which readings are truly inspired of God.

Mark 11:3 The meaning of this verse is changed in many modern versions by the addition of one word (palin) "again."

In the King James Bible, as well as many others like Tyndale, Geneva, Young's, the NKJV we have our Lord say regarding their loosing and bringing the colt tied in the village: "And if any man say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him hither."

The clear meaning is that the man who asks about the colt will send the colt with the disciples to Jesus. This is also the reading of the Majority of all texts, and of the Syriac Peshitta by Lamsa, the Spanish 1909, NKJV, and even the Douay version.

However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus add that extra word "again" (or 'back') and now have translated this verse as though it is the Lord who will return the colt again immediately. In the NASB, NIV, ESV we read: "If anyone says to you, Why are you doing this? say, The Lord has need of it and will send it BACK here immediately."

Mark 11:8 "And many spread their garments in the way: and others cut down branches off THE TREES, AND STRAWED THEM IN THE WAY."

This is the reading of the Majority of texts as well as A, D, the Old Latin, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, the Spanish, and even the Douay version.

However Vaticanus and Sinaiticus change "trees" to "fields" and omit "and strawed them in the way." The ESV, NASB, NIV read: "...and others spread leafy branches that they had cut from THE FIELDS."

Here I want to mention in passing the silly and useless textual notes often found in the NKJV. The NKJV editors say they added the notes so each person can decide for himself about the various readings, yet these "notes" are often ridiculous. For example, the NKJV footnotes verse 11:4 "And they went their way and found THE colt tied by the door..." In the NKJV footnote it mentions that the Nestle, UBS, and Majority texts read A colt, instead of THE colt. But when we get to verse 8 where the UBS text changes "trees" to "fields" and omits the whole phrase "and strawed them in the way" the NKJV has no footnote at all, as though the difference between "a colt" and "the colt" is of great importance, but the other is not worth mentioning at all. This is the type of "textual helps" we frequently find in the NKJV.

Mark 11:10 "Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh IN THE NAME OF THE LORD: Hosanna in the highest." So read the Majority of texts and A, and the NKJV, but the NASB, NIV, ESV omit the words "in the name of the Lord".

Mark 11:26 "BUT IF YE DO NOT FORGIVE, NEITHER WILL YOUR FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN FORGIVE YOUR TRESPASSES."

This entire verse is missing from the NIV, RSV, ESV versions. The NASB omitted it from 1960 to 1972, but then in 1977 and again in 1995 put it back in the text, but in brackets. The two new upcoming versions, the Holman Christian Standard and the International Standard Version have now put the verse back in the text too!

Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit the whole verse, but it is found in the Majority of all texts including A, C, and D plus at least 21 other uncial copies, the Old Latin, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopian, and some Coptic ancient versions. It is also found in the Spanish versions and the Catholic Douay version. It is in Wycliffe, Tyndale, Geneva, Bishop's, Young's, and the NKJV. The point is, Christ either said this or He didn't. It is either part of God's inerrant words or it is not. All "bibles" are not the same.

Mark 12:4 "And again he sent unto them another servant; AND AT HIM THEY CAST STONES, and wounded him in the head, AND SENT HIM AWAY shamefully handled."

All the capital lettered words are found in the majority of texts, including A, C, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, but Sinaiticus-Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV.

Mark 12:10 "And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become THE HEAD OF THE CORNER."

The Revised Version, American Standard Version, Geneva Bible and many others read literally "the head of the corner", and even though the NRSV, ESV read "cornerstone", they both tell us in a footnote that the literal Greek is "head of the corner" (Kephaleen gwvias).

The NKJV, and NASB both read "CHIEF cornerSTONE", and though not literally what the texts say, at least they give the idea that Christ is the foundation of the building. However the NIV actually says: "has become THE CAPSTONE". Now, the capstone is the final stone placed on the top of the building; not the foundation. This is the opposite meaning than the one intended.

Mark 12:19 "Master, Moses wrote unto us, If a man's brother die, and leave his wife behind him, and leave no CHILDREN (plural), that his brother should take his wife..."

The Majority of texts as well as Sinaiticus, A, C, Old Latin, Syriac and the NIV read "CHILDREN", but Vaticanus has the singular "child" and so do the NASB, ESV.

Mark 12:23 "In the resurrection THEREFORE, WHEN THEY SHALL RISE, whose wife shall she be of them?"

The phrase "when they shall rise" (hotan anastoosi) is found in the Majority of all texts, A, Old Latin, Syriac, AND in the Nestle, UBS Greek texts. It is also the reading found in the NASB, ESV, and the Holman Christian Standard.

However, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, C, and D omit this phrase and it is omitted by the ASV, NIV, RSV, NRSV, and the upcoming ISV. So we see the old RSV omitted it, but the ESV revision puts it back in; The upcoming Holman version puts it in, but the upcoming ISV does not!

Mark 12:29-30 "And Jesus answered him, The first OF ALL THE COMMANDMENTS, is Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shal love the Lord thy God with all thy heart...and with all thy strength: THIS IS THE FIRST COMMANDMENT."

The capitalized words are found in the majority of all texts, including A, C, the Old Latin, Syriac and even the Catholic Douay version. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV and the newer Catholic versions too.

Mark 12:32 "And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast well said the truth: for there is one GOD: and there is none other but he."

Here the word GOD is found in many manuscripts and ancient versions like the Old Latin, the Syriac Sinaitic, Curetonian, Palestinian, Coptic Sahadic and Boharic, Armenian, Georgian, and in the Spanish too. Even the NIV, and the new ISV include the words "there is one GOD".

However Siniaticus, A, and Vaticanus omit the word GOD and so do the NASB, RSV, ESV, and the upcoming Holman version. The NASB reads: "HE is one, and there is no one else besides him."

Mark 12:33 "And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, AND WITH ALL THE SOUL...is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices."

The words "and with all the soul" are found in the majority of all texts, including A, and D, the Syriac and Old Latin. They are also in the Douay version, but later Catholic versions now omit these words. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the RSV, NASB, NIV, ESV.

Mark 12:37 "...And THE COMMON PEOPLE heard him gladly."

What was true then, is still true today. The common people hear Him gladly. The example here is one of translation, not textual. The Greek texts have: ho polus oxlos. Versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV have translated this as "THE GREAT THRONG" (RSV, ESV) or THE LARGE CROWD heard him gladly (NASB, NIV).

This translation misses the point that they were the common people as opposed to the Pharisees and Herodians, the religious leaders of the day mentioned in verse 13, who came to catch Him in His words.

The placement of the word polus affects the meaning. The "great multitude" or "the great crowd" is ho oxlos polus, and this is found in places like John 12:9, 12; and Rev. 7:9. However, when the word polus is placed before the word oxlos (people), the meaning changes.

Many versions have missed this distinction, but among the versions that correctly have "THE COMMON PEOPLE heard him gladly" are the Bill Bible 1671, Mace N.T. 1729, the Clarke N.T. 1795, Webster's Bible 1833, Living Oracles 1835, the Longman Version 1841, the Hammond N.T. 1845, Hussey N.T. 1845, The Commonly Received Version 1851, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Revised N.T. 1862, the Dillard N.T. 1885, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, The Corrected English N.T. 1905, The Modern English N.T. 1909, the Clarke N.T. 1913, Douay 1950 (though later Catholic versions now follow the RSV reading) The Bible in Basic English 1961, the NKJV 1982, the Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602 and the Reina Valera of 1909 - "Y los que eran del común del pueblo le oían de buena gana."(but not the 1960 version), The Word of Yah 1993, The Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Common New Testament 1999, The World English Bible 2000, The Resurrection Life New Testament 2005 (Vince Garcia), The Bond Slave Version 2009, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, The New Heart English Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Far Above All Translation 2011, World English Bible 2012,  the Hebrew Names Version 2014. 


Mark 13:6 KJB - “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”


Matthew 24:5 KJB - “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”


A friend and fellow Bible believer writes: “Hi Will Kinney . A Bible critic mentioned about Christ in Mark 13:6 that is not in the Greek but is in the KJV . How do you see this verse ? Sincerely , Robert



Hi Robert. Your bible critic will NEVER show you a copy of “the” Greek that he honestly believes is the complete and inerrant N.T. Put him on the spot and ask him to show it to you - the whole N.T. that he thinks is the complete and infallible words of God.  He won’t do it.  What he is is just another self-appointed version rummaging bible agnostic who thinks he’s some kind of expert and who makes up his own “bible” version as he goes along according to his own very limited understanding and personal preferences.


There are many like him today.


It is pretty easy to address why the word “Christ” is “added” to the King James Bible and many others here as well.  ALL versions frequently add words like God, Christ, the Lord or Jesus to their translations.  


See my article on “God forbid”


http://brandplucked.webs.com/godforbid.htm


Even here, versions like the NASB, ESV, NKJV, RV, NIV, NET etc. add the word “he” and have it say “I am he”, and “he” is not in the text either.  Greek it often elliptical. Things are implied but not directly stated.


The reason something needs to be added to the translation is because it doesn’t make any sense to translate it literally. All it says here literally is “many will come in my name saying “I am” and shall deceive many.”


If some guy comes along and says to you “I am”, what is your response going to be?  You would quite naturally say to him, “Well, I am, too. And so is he, and so are they. So what?


Or, you might ask him “You are what?”  And at that point, since he is coming in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, he would then say something like “I am Christ.” or “I am the Messiah”, and that is exactly what we find in the King James Bible and is also found in the parallel passage in Matthew 24:5 - “many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many.”


As pointed out, many modern versions like the NKJV, NIV, NET, NASB, ESV, Holman, etc. also “add” the word “he” to the text. But is this any better or an improvement?  No, not at all.


Again, if some guy comes along and says to you “I am he”, you would quite naturally then ask him, “You are who?”  And once again, he would have to say something like “I am Christ” or “I am the Messiah.” Then you get the idea of what he is claiming.


So we see there are good reasons why the KJB and many other Bible translations show these deceivers as claiming “I am Christ”


The KJB is not at all the only Bible to “add” the word Christ here. So too do the Anglo-Saxon Gospels 900 A.D., Tyndale 1534, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, Mace N.T. 1729, Worsley Version 1770, Wesley N.T. 1755, Haweis N.T. 1795, The Revised Translation 1815, the Webster Bible 1833,  The Pickering N.T. 1840, The Longman Version 1841, The Commonly Received Version 1851, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, Sawyer N.T. 1858, The Revised New Testament 1862, The Clarke N.T. 1913,  New Life Version 1969, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Last Days Bible 1999, The Tomson N.T.2002 - “I am the Christ”, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, The Easy-to-Read Version 2006 - “I am Messiah”, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, Conservative Bible 2011 - “I am Christ”, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2011 - “saying, I am [Mashiach]”, and The Translator’s Bible 2014 - “saying, I am Messiah”.



Foreign language Bibles


Among foreign language bible that also say “I am Christ” are Luther’s German bible 1545 - "Ich bin Christus!", French Martin 1744 - “suis le Christ”, French Ostervald 1998, and the French Le Bible du Semeur 1999 - “Je suis le Messie”, the Polish Updated Gdansk bible 2013 - “Ja jestem Chrystusem”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Reina Valera 1960 and 1995 “Yo soy el Cristo”, the Tagalog bible 1998, Portuguese Almeida 2009, the Portuguese O Livro 2000 - “Eu sou o Cristo”, Hungarian Easy-to-Read Version 2012 - “hogy én vagyok a Messiás”, the Italian La Bibbia della Gioia 2006, the Nederlands Het Boek 2007 - “zij de Christus zijn”, the Norwegian En Leavened Bok 1988 - “erklære at de er Messias”, the Bulgarian Protestant Bible 2000 - “Аз съм Христос”, the Czech BKR Bible - Já jsem Kristus”, the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - “Ik ben de Christus”, the Chinese Union Traditional bible, The Basque (Navarro-Labourdin): NT - “Ni naiz Christ”, the Haitian Creole Bible - “ki Kris la” and the Russian Synodal Translation.


Bible Commentators


John Gill - “For many shall come in my name,.... Taking upon them the name of the Messiah: saying, I am [Christ]; the word "Christ," is rightly supplied from Matthew 24:5;  otherwise in the original it is only, "I am"


Adam Clarke Commentary - “Saying, I am - The Christ, is added by eight MSS., Coptic, Armenian, Saxon, and four of the Itala.”


Bengel’s Gnomon of the New Testament - “Mark 13:6 ἐγὼ εἰμι, I am, The Predicate is to be supplied, viz. the Christ”


Critical Commentary on the Whole Bible - “For many shall come in my name, saying, I am [Christ]; and shall deceive many.  see Matthew 24:5.”


The King James Bible is always right.

 

 

Mark 13:8 "For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be earthquakes in divers places, and there shall be famines AND TROUBLES: these are the beginnings of SORROWS."

There are two problems in this verse - one is textual and the other is translational. The words "and troubles" are found in the majority of all texts, Alexandrinus, some Old Latin, the Syriac and the NKJV, and Spanish translations. However Siniaticus and Vaticanus omit them and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV.

The translational problems has to do with the word "sorrows". Sorrows would be the personal afflictions and difficulties faced by the people themselves. Versions that correctly translate this word as sorrows are Tyndale, Geneva, Young's, Douay, Bishop's Bible, Webster, Third Millennium Bible and the NKJV.

The word translated in the KJB as "sorrows" is also used in the LXX to translate "sorrows" in Exodus 15:14; Psalms 18:4, 5 "the sorrows of death compassed me...the sorrows of hell compassed me about", and as "anguish" in Deut. 2:25 "and be in anguish because of thee".

Other versions have variations of the same meaning. For example: "the beginnings of SUFFERING" RSV, Throes - Darby, travail - RV, ASV; beginnings of troubles - Bible in Basic English, Contemporary English Version; "the horrors to come" - New Living Translation; "but these are nothing compared to what is coming" - the Message.

However the NASB, NIV, ESV have introduced a New Age buzz word by translating this as: "these are the beginnings of BIRTH PANGS." This phrase is often used by New Agers to describe the coming New Age of Christ Consciousness and personal godhood. In fact, the New English Bible 1970 says: "these are the birth pangs of the new age."

Mark 13:14 "But when ye see the abomination of desolation SPOKEN OF BY DANIEL THE PROPHET, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judea flee to the mountains."

The whole phrase "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" and to which the Lord refers when He says "let him that readeth understand" is found in the majority of all texts as well as Alexandrinus, the Old Latin, the Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopian, and at least 24 other uncial copies. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit this phrase and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV.

Mark 13:17 "But woe to them THAT ARE WITH CHILD, and to them that give suck in those days!"

An interesting and very subtle change has taken place in the modern versions here. They have now become abortion friendly. All the older versions read: "to them that are WITH CHILD" including Tyndale, Geneva, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, even the RSV, and Young's, Darby, Douay, and the Hebrew Names Version.

The NASB read "those that ARE WITH CHILD" from 1960 up through 1977, but then in 1995 the NASB update version changed the reading to: "THOSE THAT ARE PREGNANT", instead of "those that are WITH CHILD".

A modern woman wouldn't think twice about terminating her "pregnancy", but tell her she is terminating HER CHILD and she might reconsider. Now the NKJV, ESV, NIV, ISV, Holman, and the NASB 95 all read: "them that are pregnant".

Mark 13:23 "But take ye heed: BEHOLD , I have foretold you all things."

This little word BEHOLD (idou) is found in the majority of all texts AND Sinaiticus, as well as A and C. It is in the NKJV, the Catholic Douay, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, and in the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, and the NASB.

However Vaticanus omits this little word, and so do the NIV, ESV, and the more modern Catholic versions like the New Jerusalem.

Mark 13:27 "And he shall send HIS (autou) angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds..."

This little word HIS is found in the majority of all texts AND in Sinaiticus again, as well as A, C, Old Latin, Syriac, the Catholic Douay, and in the NIV and the upcoming ISV.

However Vaticanus omits the word "his" and this time the NASB, ESV, and later Catholic versions follow Vaticanus and reject Sinaiticus by saying "the angels" instead of His angels.

Mark 13:33 "Take ye heed, watch AND PRAY: for ye know not when the time is."

The words "and pray" are in the majority of all texts including Sinaiticus, A, C, the Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Slavonic, and in the Revised Version and the American Standard Version, as well as the Catholic Douay version.

But Vaticanus omits the words "and pray" and so too do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV, and the more modern Catholic versions. Nothing like being consistently inconsistent, is there?

Mark 14:19 "And they began to be sorrowful, and to say unto him one by one, Is it I? AND ANOTHER SAID, IS IT I?"

These last words "And another said, is it I?" are found in the majority of all texts including A and D and some Old Latin copies, and in the Spanish Reina Valera, NKJV, Tyndale, Geneva, Coverdale, Bishop's Bible, and others.

However Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and C omit these words and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:22 "And as they did eat, JESUS took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, EAT: this is my body."

The word JESUS is in the majority of all texts as well as Sinaiticus, A and C, and Jesus is in the NIV and the ISV. However Vaticanus omits the word JESUS and so do the NASB, ESV, and the Holman Standard.

The word EAT (fagete) is in the majority of texts plus at least 18 uncials, the Old Latin and some Coptic Boharic versions, and the NKJV, but the Alexandrian texts omit this word and so do the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:24 "And he said unto them, This is my blood of the NEW testament, which is shed for many."

Here the word NEW, as in the NEW testament, is in the majority of all texts, A, the Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, and the Catholic Douay versions. But Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and C omit the word "new" and so do the more recent Catholic versions and the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:27 "And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended BECAUSE OF ME THIS NIGHT: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered."

There are two problems in this verse. First of all, the KJB as well as Tyndale, Geneva, the Revised Version and the American Standard Version correctly translate this phrase as "shall be offended" - that is, they shall stumble. In fact, the NKJV puts it this way. But beginning with the RSV, the NASB, NIV, and ESV all say "you will FALL AWAY", as though they would commit apostasy and forever be lost. The new ISV now paraphrases this as "you will turn against me", while the Holman Standard says: "you will fall" and then footnotes "or stumble".

The second problem is textual. The words "because of me this night" are in the majority of all texts including A, C correction, the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian and even in the Douay version. But Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the more recent Catholic versions and the NASB, NIV, ESV, ISV.

Mark 14:41 And he cometh the third time, and saith unto them, SLEEP ON NOW, AND TAKE YOUR REST; it is enough, the hour is come: behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners."

This verse is of interest in that ALL TEXTS, including the Majority, the Textus Receptus and even the UBS, Nestle - Aland texts show these words as a STATEMENT, not as a QUESTION. "Sleep on now, and take your rest" is a statement, and is so translated by Geneva, Tyndale, the Revised Version, American Standard Version, Darby, Young's, Douay, Green's interlinear, Bible in Basic English, Weymouth, and the Catholic Douay.

Some commentators see these words as spoken in irony or as a reproach. I understand them to be highly significant in a spiritual sense. The Lord Jesus Christ was in the midst of establishing the New Covenant with the sacrifice of Himself and the shedding of His own blood for the sins of His people.

We are told in Isaiah 59:16 "And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him." Likewise in the prototypical covenant that God first made with Abraham our father, we read in Genesis 15:12-18 that Abraham WAS ASLEEP while God Himself made the covenant. Abraham had no part in the making of this covenant, and we have no part in making the New Covenant.

Genesis 15:12 "And when the sun was going down, A DEEP SLEEP fell upon Abram...and behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces (the divided bodies of the heifer, goat and ram offered unto God)...In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram."

I understand the words of the Lord "Sleep on now and take your rest" to mean that they would have no active part in the making of the New Covenant but that they would enter into the Rest of an accomplished redemption because of Christ's sacrificial death in our place. See Hebrews chapter four where it speaks of the rest for the people of God and those who enter by faith into this rest have ceased from their own works.

In any event, instead of having these words "sleep on now and take your rest" as a statement, the NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV, and ISV have all changed this to a question, saying "Are you still sleeping and resting?" - NKJV.

 

Mark 14:68 KJB - "But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out AND THE COCK CROWED."  

NIV - "But he denied it. "I don't know or understand what you're talking about," he said, and went out into the entryway."  

The NIV Spanish and NIV Portuguese versions also omit the words "and the cock crowed"

 

Mark 14:68. I mention this one because it is of interest to see the changing nature of what the modern scholars like to call "the science of textual criticism". Here we read: "But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; AND THE COCK CREW."

These last words "and the cock crew" are found in the majority of all texts including A, C and D, the ancient Syriac, Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic and Georgian versions. They are also in the Revised Version 1885 and the American Standard Version of 1901. They are found in Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Beza N.T. 1599, the KJB 1611, Darby 1890, Weymouth 1913, Young's 1898 and Douay Rheims 1610 to name but a few.  

Both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words.

  • Some will say, but the "oldest and best manuscripts" (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) omit these words. Well, looking at verse 72 we read "And THE SECOND TIME the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept." 
  • Here we see that Sinaiticus omits even these words "the second time", but they are found in Vaticanus!!
  • These are the two so called "oldest and best" manuscripts, which disagree with each other thousands of times in the New Testament, and are the primary reason for the omission of some 3000 words and at least 15 whole verses in most modern versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, ISV.
  • For a further look at what Sinaiticus and Vaticanus actually say, please see my article at:
  • http://brandplucked.webs.com/oldestandbestmss.htm

 

When Westcott and Hort and the Nestle Critical text first came out, they completely omitted these words from the text (at least through the 1975 Nestle's 21st edition), but fairly recently have put them back in the text but  [in brackets]. This is not because of any additional information or the discovery of some old manuscripts; they just changed their minds.

The first English version to omit these words was the liberal RSV and the NIVs 1973, 1978, 1984, and 2011 editions also omit "and the cock crew".  The New English Bible 1970 and The Revised English Bible 1989 also omit them.

Likewise the Jehovah Witness New World Translation of both 1961 and the 2013 revision still omit these words and it reads like the NIV, saying: " But he denied it, saying: “Neither do I know him nor do I understand what you are talking about,” and he went outside to the entryway."

 

The Catholic Connection

The previous Douay-Rheims of 1582 and the Douay of 1950 both included "and the cock crew."  However the 1968 Jerusalem Bible omitted them (just like the RSV, NIV and JW version). Then the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible put the words in brackets -[At that moment a cock crowed.]  But now the 1985 New Jerusalem bible puts them fully back in the text with no brackets this time.

 

The NASB is interesting in that from 1960 to 1977 they completely omitted these four words from their text through 9 different NASB editions, but then in 1995 the NASB committee put them back in their text and so did the NRSV in 1989 and they are now in the ESV 2011, the ISV 2014, the NET version and Holman Christian Standard versions.  

This is the true nature of the so called "science" of textual criticism.

 

These words - "and the cock crew" - are inspired Scripture.  In Mark 14:30 Jesus said to Peter that "before the cock crow TWICE, thou shalt deny me thrice".  Then in 14:68 "and the cock crew", and in 14:72 we read in all texts "And THE SECOND TIME the cock crew."

The words "and the cock crew" ARE found in the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1901 and 2007, the French Ostervald 1996, the Italian Diodati 1649, New Diodati 1991, the Portuguese O Livro 2000, and the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995. 


Mark 15:3 KJB - "And the chief priests accused him of many things: BUT HE ANSWERED NOTHING."


These last words - "but he answered nothing" - are omitted by the Vatican Versions, but they are found in manuscripts N, W, Delta, Theta, Psi, f13, 33, 565, 579, 1424, 2542, the Old Latin a and c,  and the Syriac Sinaitic and the Syriac Harklean ancient versions.  


These words - αυτος δε ουδεν απεκρινατο - are found in the Greek text of Scrivener 1894

The previous English versions did not contain these additional words. The King James Bible was the first English Bible to include them.


This is also the reading of John Wesley's N.T. 1755, The Worsley N.T. 1770, The Clarke N.T. 1795, The Thomson Translation 1808, Webster's Bible 1833, The Pickering N.T. 1840, The Longman Version 1841, The Revised New Testament 1862, The Revised English Bible 1877, Young's 1898, The Clarke N.T. 1913, the New Life Version 1969, the NKJV 1982, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, The Last Days New Testament 1999, The Revised Young's Literal Translation 1999, Green's Literal 2005, The Natural Israelite Bible, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, The Conservative Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010, The Scripture For All Translation 2010, The Voice 2012, the Modern English Version 2014, The Modern Literal New Testament 2014 and The Hebraic Roots Bible 2015.

 

Foreign Language Bibles  

 

Foreign Language Bibles that contain the words "but he answered nothing" are the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991 - "ma egli non rispondeva nulla.", The Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602 and the Reina Valera Gómez Bible 2005 - "más el no respondió nada.", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 - "porém ele nada respond", The French Martin Bible 1744 - "mais il ne repondit rien.", The German Schlachter Bible 2000 - “Er aber antwortete ihnen nights.”, the Polish Gdanska bible 1881 and the Updated Gdansk Bible 2013 - "ale on nic nie odpowiedział.", the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "maar Hij antwoordde diets." and The Romanian Fidela Bible 2014 - dar el nu a  răspuns nimic.”


Mark 15:28 - “And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.”




Mark 15:27-28 "And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left. AND THE SCRIPTURE WAS FULFILLED, WHICH SAITH, AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH THE TRANSGRESSORS."



This verse is a fulfillment of the predictions of the crucified Messiah spoken by the prophet Isaiah in chapter 53 - "...because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." Isaiah 53:12.  


Mark 15:28 is the text of the Reformation Bibles in all languages.  


The modern Critical Text Vatican Versions omit the verse.


The whole of verse 28 "and the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors." is missing from Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, and D. 


It is omitted entirely from the text in such versions as the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, The Message, and the Jehovah Witness New World Translation.


The NASB omitted the whole verse from its text from 1960 to 1972, but in 1977 and again in 1995 they placed it back in the text but in brackets, signifying it is probably not in the originals.  


NIV - Even though the English version of the NIV completely omits the verse, yet the NIV Portuguese version, Nova Versão Internacional  2000 contains the entire verse, reading: “e cumpriu-se a Escritura que diz: “Ele foi contado entre os transgressores”


The Holman Christian Standard places the verse in the text but in brackets, while the ISV (International Standard Version) puts the whole verse back in the text with no brackets. How is that for consistency? 


The Catholic Connection



Both the earlier Catholic Douay-Rheims 1582, the American Douay-Rheims 1899 and the Douay Version 1950 all contained the entire verse. But the more modern Catholic bibles like St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, and the New Jerusalem 1985 omit the verse just like the ESV, NIV, NET. The Catholic versions constantly disagree among themselves. 


And now the latest Catholic Sacred Bible Public Domain Version of 2009 has come out, and it once again includes the entire verse of Mark 15:28.



The entire verse is found in the Majority of all Greek texts including at least 24 uncials (capital letter manuscripts) like E, F, G, H, K, L, M, P, S, U, V, Gamma, Delta, Theta, Pi, Sigma, Omega, the Old Latin or, c, ff2, g1, l, n, r1, the Syriac Peshitta, Harkelian, Palestinian, some Coptic Boharic copies, the Gothic, Armenian, Slavonic and Ethiopian ancient versions.


The Anglo Saxon Gospels dated to around 1000 A.D. contained the whole verse - Mark 15:28 þa wæs þt ge-writ gefylled. þt cwyð; & he wæs mid unriht-wisum geteald;



Among the English Bibles that include this verse are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishop's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Beza’s N.T. 1599, King James Bible 1611, Wesley's N.T. 1755, Worsley Version 1770, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795, the Thomson Bible 1808, The Revised Translation 1815, Kneeland N.T. 1823, Webster's 1833, the Living Oracles 1835, the Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Revised N.T. 1862, The American Bible Union N.T. 1865, The Emphatic Diaglot Bible 1865, the Smith Bible 1876, The  Revised English Bible 1877, the Sharpe Bible 1883, the Dillard N.T. 1885, Young's 1898, the Clarke N.T. 1913, the New English N.T. 1961, The New Berkeley Version 1969, The New Life Version 1969, Living Bible 1971, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Lawrie Translation 1998, Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Worldwide English N.T. 1998, The Last Days Bible 1999, World English Bible 2000, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Tomson N.T. 2002, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, Green’s Literal 2005, the Pickering N.T. 2005, the Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, The Faithful N.T. 2009, The English Majority Text Bible 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Work of God’s Children Bible 2011, The Aramaic N.T. 2011, Conservative Bible 2011, Bond Slave Version 2012, The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2013, the Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014, The Modern English Bible 2014 and the ISV (International Standard Version) 2014 and the International Children’s Bible 2015.


Foreign Language Bibles that include Mark 15:28


Among foreign language bibles that contain Mark 15:28 are the Afrikaans Bible 1953,  Albanian, the Smith & Van Dyke Arabic Bible, Bulgarian Protestant Bible 2000, Cebuano Bible 2001, Czech BKR Bible, Chinese Union Traditional bible, Danish, Dutch Staten Vertaling bible, French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1998 and French Louis Segond 2007, Gaelic, Luther’s German bible 1545 and the German Schlachter bible 2000, , Gypsy Rhomanese, Haitian Creole Bible,  Hungarian Karoli bible and the Hungarian New Translation 1990, Icelandic, Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Italian Nuova Riveduta 2006, Latvian, Maori Bible, Norwegian Det Norse Bibelselskap 1930 and En Leavened Bok 1988, the Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013, Portuguese Sagradas Escrituras and the Almeida Corregida bible 2009 and Portuguese NIV version 2000, the Quichua Bible 2010, Rumanian Cornilescu and Fidela Bible 2014, Russian Synodal Version and Russian Священное Писание Bible 2013, Shuar N.T.,  the Somaili Bible 2008, Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, Reina Valera 1909-2011, the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos 1998, Turkish, Ukranian, Uma N.T., and the Vietnamese Bản Dịch 2011.


The Modern Greek Bible - Και επληρωθη η γραφη η λεγουσα· Και μετα ανομων ελογισθη.


The Modern Hebrew Bible - וימלא הכתוב האמר ואת פשעים נמנה׃



Get the Bible that has ALL of God’s inspired and inerrant words in it - the King James Holy Bible. Don’t settle for a corrupt version that nobody, not even the people who put them out, believes is the inerrant words of the living God.


 

Mark 15:34 "And at the ninth hour JESUS cried with a loud voice, SAYING (legwn), Eloi, Eloi, lamasabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, MY GOD, why hast thou forsaken me?"

I have highlighted the words "Jesus" and the second "My God" for a reason. Remember that the whole of verse 28 is omitted in the NASB, NIV, ESV because of Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, and D, yet these "oldest and best manuscripts" disagree with each other in literally thousands of places.

In 15:34 manuscript D omits the word "Jesus", but it is found in the others. On the other hand, Vaticanus omits the second "MY GOD", but the others have it and this time the NASB, NIV, ESV do not follow Vaticanus but the others instead.

Then in Mark 15:39 we read: "And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so CRIED OUT (kraksas), and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God."

Here the verb "cried out" is in the majority of all texts as well as A, C, D, and the Old Latin, the Syriac, Douay, AND in the NIV, AND the brand new ISV (International Standard Version). However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit the words "cried out" and so do the NASB, ESV, and the Holman Standard.

It is obvious the "scholars" don't agree among themselves by the conflicting versions they keep producing. I trust God and believe He has kept His promises to preserve His inerrant words and has done so in the time tested, God approved King James Bible. How about you?

Mark 16:9-20 Huge textual differences between Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and all other texts.

Modern scholarship has cast serious doubt as to the authenticity of the last 12 verses in the gospel of Mark.

Mark 16

9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. 14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

There are many articles on the internet showing the overwhelming textual evidence supporting the authenticity of these twelve verses. I will discuss it a little, but for those interested in seeing more, here is a good article about it.

http://www.purewords.org/kjb1611/html/mark16_9.htm

All 12 verses are omitted by both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and it is these two manuscripts that are primarily responsible for the omission of some 3000 words and at least 15 whole verses in the New Testament in such versions as the RV, ASV, NASB, NIV, RSV, and ESV.

However these twelve verses are found in the vast Majority of all texts. Dean Burgon says they are present in 618 of 620 known manuscripts in his day. They are also in Alexandrinus, C, D, the Old Latin, which predates anything we have in Greek, the Syriac Peshitta, Harclean, Curetonian, Palestinian versions, the Coptic Sahidic and Boharic, the Gothic, Armenian, and Ethiopian ancient versions.

Dean Burgon, in his book The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, shows 12 church fathers who lived before the end of the 3rd century who quoted from this section of Scripture, including Irenaeus 202 A.D., Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Justin Martyr.

In his book, Which Bible, David Otis Fuller cites Dean John Burgon as saying: "I insist and am prepared to prove that the text of these two Codexes (Vaticanus or B, and Sinaiticus also called Aleph) is very nearly the foulest in existence," (Pp. 126-127) and "That they exhibit fabricated texts is demonstrable....B and Aleph are covered all over with blots -- Aleph even more than B....We suspect that these two manuscripts are indebted for their preservation, SOLELY TO THEIR ASCERTAINED EVIL CHARACTER." (Pg. 93, 128)

See my short article on "the oldest and best manuscripts" that reveals what Sinaiticus and Vaticanus really say:

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/oldbest.html

Dean Burgon in his book Revision Revised also says: "What we are just now insisting upon is only the depraved text of codices A, B, C, D, -- especially of B, D, and Aleph. And because this is a matter which lies at root of the whole controversy, and because we cannot afford that there shall exist in our reader's mind the slightest doubt on this part of the subject...We venture to assure him, without a particle of hesitation, that B, D , and Aleph (Sinaiticus), are three of the most scandalously corrupt copies extant: -- exhibit the most shamefully mutilated texts which are anywhere to be met with: -- have become, by whatever process (for their history is wholly unknown), the depositories of the largest amount of fabricated readings, ancient blunders, and intentional perversions of Truth, -- which are discoverable in any known copies of the Word of GOD." (Revision Revised p.15, 16)

When you see the footnote the "oldest and best manuscripts" know that they are referring to Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.

The confusion and doubt thrown upon these inspired verses of Scripture can be seen in the modern versions themselves. The RSV of 1952 actually omits all twelve verses from their text and places them in small italicized letters at the bottom of the page. Then the NRSV, and the ESV (both revisions of the RSV) have put them back in the text in brackets and separated from the rest of the chapter and with a note: "SOME of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16:9-20."

SOME!?! I thought "some" meant several, not TWO! The NASB is interesting in that it continues to change from one edition to the next. The 1960 NASB brackets verses 9-20 and footnotes "Some of the oldest mss. omit." Then it adds another ending to Mark. Addition "And they promptly reported all these instructions to Peter and his companions. And after that, Jesus Himself sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation."

Then in 1972 the NASB omitted this alternate ending, but in 1977 they put it back in. Then in 1995 they once again took it out!

The NIV 1978 edition draws a line between verse 8 and 9 and then notes: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not contain verses 9-20." But the 1984 Scofield NIV edition also draws a line and separates these 12 verses and footnotes: "Verses 9-20 are not found in the two most ancient manuscripts, the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus...but it is quoted by Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the second century." So are Sinaiticus and Vaticanus "the most reliable", or have they now been downgraded to "the most ancient"? Neither of which is true at all. They certainly are not the most reliable neither are they the earliest manuscripts.

But now the 2001 TNIV (Today's New International Version) has also drawn a line between these verses and the others; tells us "The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20" and then in smaller italicized letters print the last twelve verses, thus casting serious doubt as to their validity.

Doesn't it seem just a tad unscholarly and hypocritical for the NASB, NIV, ESV to include these 12 verses in their "bibles", and yet to omit the other THOUSANDS of words from the New Testament based primarily on these same two manuscripts?

I hope this study on the gospel of Mark has been beneficial for you. You should be able to clearly see that modern scholarship is constantly changing and they have no settled text of God's inerrant words. The modern versions disagree among themselves and create doubt and uncertainty as to what our Lord really says in His inerrant words of truth and life.

Believe God's promises. Get yourself an Authorized King James Holy Bible, and rest in the faithfulness of Almighty God to preserve His pure and everlasting words.

"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen" Revelation 22:21

 Return to Articles -  http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm


 

 

Westcott and Hort originally adopted this strange variant reading because of their blind devotion to the Vatican manuscript, but not even the Revised Version of 1885 or the ASV of 1901 followed this strange and contradictory reading, but stayed with the traditional - "when THE DAUGHTER OF HERODIAS HERSELF came in and danced".